Male desire, privilege and consent
Cruising is common among Gay men irrespective of their cultural, socio-economic, caste, and demographic background. For those who do not have access to the internet and dating apps, cruising is still how Gay men or Men who have sex with Men (MSM) find their sexual partners.
When there is no way to tell if a person is Gay or straight, and in a society that doesn’t have exclusive spaces for Gay men to meet casually or socialise, cruising plays an important role in finding one another. A common cruising situation is when you walk down the street and catch sight of someone you are attracted to. Then you make eye contact in passing and hold it a bit longer than most people would casually. If the other person immediately breaks the eye contact, then he isn’t interested. In Indian context this is a bit tricky, but as someone who is part of the culture that stares and gawks at anyone, the eye-contact ‘lock’ period is bit lengthier than few other cultures. After the initial lock, you may pretend to carry on with whatever you were doing while checking to see if the other guy also stares at you in regular interval. This can be repeated until both parties are sure there is mutual interest and a conversation can take place. If the other person doesn’t stop or turn around, you can assume they are not interested and you move on. [Citing the source on cruising that helped me write the above content: https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-signals-or-body-language-for-gay-cruising/answer/James-Finn-12?share=b61b8e4b&srid=pkij]
Until gay dating/hook-up apps became a thing in India, this is how I met other men. And then there are the ‘methods’ that is prevalent among men irrespective of their sexual orientation — feeling-up on the person in trains, buses and other crowded places. While this non-consensual touch is seen as harassment and sexual abuse in the heterosexual world; how does the homosexual world sees it? What is the ‘acceptable’ consensual limit for a community that doesn’t have any legal or social protection for their desire? Where does the homosexual world derive the ideas and morale from? The heterosexual world? How can I rely on the ideas and laws of a world that looks at me with disgust and disapproval; where my mere existence might offend them? I don’t think any homosexual man is answerable for these questions until the heterosexual world accepts a broader “Queered” moral and political value as its own and incorporate it in their world or at least in their ‘liberal’ world. Also, while the whole argument to amend Section 377 is based on adult consent, it is important for the Gay community in India to have a honest conversation about consent among ourselves. And there is no two way when it comes to consent.
Sex plays a crucial role in the homosexual world. While it is not necessary that one has to have sex to affirm their sexuality; in the current hetero-centric scenario acting up on one’s homosexual desire is more than sexual need. Also, the patriarchal structure that doesn’t condemn male desire (read heterosexual male desire) makes it easy for most Gay men to act upon their desire. The exploration during adolescence which is seen as a ‘boy’ thing further enables to act upon the desire and blurs the line between same-sex desire and sexual/body exploration. This is how I see sex in my world. It is available easily, there is guilt at varying level; but that never stops. I had and still have difficulty in understanding the relationship dynamics of my straight friends. I do not know how a straight person would express their interest to the other individual in the physical world.
The media which shows the heterosexual world is always from a heterosexual cis-male gaze. Even women’s desire and needs are expressed or conveyed in a way how cis-men understand or want. Our mainstream and porn films both portray women and their action to satisfy heterosexual male desire. The conversations, the romance, the seduction everything is straight out of a man’s mind. When women express their desire it is policed by men (straight and Gay). The inherent structure favours men — within their context — in any disadvantaged state.
Trying to fit a community in the context of another community’s moral value would be a great injustice especially when the later is condemned. Likewise, would a film made by a cis-man on female desire represent women and their desire? Men do not have issue on how women are shown in mainstream movies or porn. When their own gaze is sanitised and presented in a believable setup, it disturbs their consciousness.
Quite a few Gay films that are made in Tamil reflect the moral values of the ‘accepted’ heterosexual world. Almost 100% of the time these film makers do not identify themselves as men who desire men. The Gay men in these films who are in love wouldn’t have touched each other. They’d fight for their parent’s approval to get together (not to have sex, but to live together!). The chastity of both the lovers is what would make the parents and society accept them. Do these movie represent the Gay community? If yes, which one? Now before some chaste Gay man jumps on me for stereotyping Gay men; let me say that I am not denying your thought of being chaste. You very well exist in my Gay world as much as cis-men (especially Tamil cis-men on Facebook who talk women’s rights) who understand feminism. If this is one extreme, the other extreme is where straight men teach us how to be Gay or what it means to be Gay.
